Zero Hedge Kindly Requests The Immediate Resignation Of Mary Schapiro For Gross Breach Of Professional Responsibilities

Tyler Durden's picture

Ever wonder why the final SEC report on the flash crash doesn't match up to the forensic evidence found by Nanex?

It seems the SEC/CFTC failed to disclose they didn't get around to interviewing the traders that actually executed the algorithm blamed for dumping 75,000 emini contracts on the market "without regard to price or time" until 2 weeks after publishing their final report on the flash crash! Apparently, they were making a lot of things up to fit a foregone conclusion.

According to the media, it was Waddell & Reed who executed those trades right? Well, no. Barclays executed the contracts using their time tested algorithm called Participation. You simply can't crash a market with the Participation algorithm. This is an algorithm that in fact has sophisticated price and time components. This is an algorithm that would only sell at the offer -- and never at the bid. This was discovered and pointed out by Nanex after just one day reviewing the actual 6,438 eMini contract trades (75,000 contracts) which ZeroHedge helped obtain. But the media was happy to hang the guilt on an out of town mid-west Mutual Fund company, and besides all this stuff was getting way too complicated. After all, when it comes to such complexities, it is only economy PhDs who are fit to opine at will.

Only the SEC/CFTC wasn't counting on anyone double checking their work...

So a week after Nanex published their findings on the eMini trades, the CFTC holds their very first interview with Vijay Pant -- the man in charge of executing the infamous W&R trades at Barclays using the Participation algorithm. Here's a link to the CFTC website showing that meeting. This was the first time the SEC/CFTC actually interviewed those with intimate knowledge about the algorithm blamed for the flash crash in the SEC/CFTC final report.

How many heads will roll for this faux pas? And if it is only one, it better be that of Madoff "dear friend" Mary Schapiro who may have slipped through the cracks after the biggest ponzi scheme, since the US government, was handed to her on a silver platter.

But not this time.

If it is indeed confirmed that the agency, which is already in hot water for purposefully destroying evidence confirming various hedge funds have participated in insider trading, we are confident that the mere onslaught of class action lawsuits against the SEC, which one can now accuse of out right cover up, by anyone who lost money on May 6, will force not one but countless resignations, as the rats abandon the sinking ship, terrified by the prospect of civil and criminal liability pursuing their very own sad and pathetic bureaucratic careers.

We urge any and all class action lawyers among our readers to do their thing.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
taraxias's picture

D.I.S.G.U.S.T.I.N.G

 

Hats off ZH, you are a beacon of light and truth.

TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

"Princeton study reveals that excessive on-the-job viewing of midget tranny porn leads to confusion regarding the direction of time"

 

bigdumbnugly's picture

hear hear!

and don't stop there.  gary gensler and the cftc crew are in line for a comeuppance too.

until the day that they face REAL punishment (not just resignations) foe their evils, all these posts and comments are still just so much straw.

Comay Mierda's picture

What is their motive for covering up the truth?

Great Unwashed's picture

Lazy? Incompetent? Protecting former and future colleagues? On the take?

Take your pick.

DoChenRollingBearing's picture

Yes, OUT with Mary Schapiro!  And please take OUT Eric "Fast and Furious" Holder with her!  Washington is even more disgusting than usual these days.

I only kill chickens and wheat's picture

The BearingMan rolls the thread back to OnTopic with a +13.

ps will take time on the FRN art. cheers.

Yamaha's picture

Your right - if it was a real story CNBS will be all over it tomorrow with Lies-men and friends.........

BlackholeDivestment's picture

...the motive is their claim dominon. If you accept their false claim you are bound. That is the mark of the beast and the seal of the ''new order''.

macholatte's picture

From Wikipedia: The expressions misfeasance and nonfeasance, and occasionally malfeasance, are used in English law with reference to the discharge of public obligations existing by common law, custom or statute.

When a contract creates a duty that does not exist at common law, there are three things the parties can do wrong:

  • Nonfeasance is to ignore and take no indicated action - neglect.
  • Misfeasance is to take inappropriate action or give intentionally incorrect advice.
  • Malfeasance is hostile, aggressive action taken to injure the client's interests.

 

 

MISFEANCE 

Misfeasance in public office is a cause of action in the civil courts of England and Wales and certain Commonwealth countries. It is an action against the holder of a public office, alleging in essence that the office-holder has misused or abused his power. The tort can be traced back to 1703 when Chief Justice Holt decided that a landowner could sue a police Constable who deprived him of his right to vote.[1] The tort was revived in 1985 when it was used so that French Turkey producers could sue the Ministry of Agriculture over a dispute that harmed their sales.

·  Generally, a civil defendant will be liable for misfeasance if the defendant owed a duty of care toward the plaintiff, the defendant breached that duty of care by improperly performing a legal act, and the improper performance resulted in harm to the plaintiff.

In theory, misfeasance is distinct from Nonfeasance. Nonfeasance is a term that describes a failure to act that results in harm to another party. Misfeasance, by contrast, describes some affirmative act that, though legal, causes harm. In practice, the distinction is confusing and uninstructive. Courts often have difficulty determining whether harm resulted from a failure to act or from an act that was improperly performed.

 

n most cases, the essentials to bring an action of misfeasance in public office are that the office-holder acted illegally, knew he was doing so, and knew or should reasonably have known that third parties would suffer loss as a result.


MALFEASANCE 

 

Malfeasance in office, or official misconduct, is the commission of an unlawful act, done in an official capacity, which affects the performance of official duties. Malfeasance in office is often grounds for a for cause removal of an elected official by statute or recall election.

 

Malfeasance has been defined by appellate courts in other jurisdictions as a wrongful act which the actor has no legal right to do; as any wrongful conduct which affects, interrupts or interferes with the performance of official duty; as an act for which there is no authority or warrant of law; as an act which a person ought not to do; as an act which is wholly wrongful and unlawful; as that which an officer has no authority to do and is positively wrong or unlawful; and as the unjust performance of some act which the party performing it has no right, or has contracted not, to do.

 

The court then went on to use yet another definition, "malfeasance is the doing of an act which an officer had no legal right to do at all and that when an officer, through ignorance, inattention, or malice, does that which they have no legal right to do at all, or acts without any authority whatsoever, or exceeds, ignores, or abuses their powers, they are guilty of malfeasance."

 

KKAOSS's picture

YEP 404 it is, rat bastards

way-out-west's picture

Tyler, is this the same meeting / notes?

Still accessible here (minus the "www")

If that's it, better get it / archive it while the gettin's good....

dwdollar's picture

I wonder what her office dildo looks like. It's probably all worn and shit.

ShankyS's picture

If it is powered by an HFT algo you know that things pulsates 20,000/second on LOW. 

Calmyourself's picture

That frequency will turn her bones to water eventually.. but probably worth it..

sabra1's picture

she borrowed it from janet napolitano, who had borrowed it from barney frank!

bigdumbnugly's picture

if this is true then she will soon be dying a slow and painful death from some sort of nasty bacteria or whatnot anyway.

ok, so let's concentrate on gensler...

AldousHuxley's picture

she's got one of those menorah 9 candles in 1 kind

4horse's picture

shame on you

 

discrediting yourself

now contaminated

 

 

What better way to undermine the very rational and legitimate view that Mary Shapiro must go due to . . .

Usury. amongst every other concomitant crime in corrupt use amidst her cohort

who r who  .  .  .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUfS8LyeUyM&feature=player_detailpage

wang's picture

I believe that Ms Shapiro serves at the pleasure of President Barack Obama,  accordingly various .gov agencies will be reviewing all posts, contributions and comments on the Zero Hedge Blog dating from the present to its inception.

On a separate note Tony Rezko is counting the days until January 2013 when President Obama yields his office to his successor and in advance of that occasion provides various and sundry pardons.

Calmyourself's picture

Possible AT his pleasure cuz as I hear it Reggie Love is all about bammy's pleasure..

Clockwork Orange's picture

Princeton study funded by $14B federal grant as advocated by SEIU

Caggge's picture

The Tylers are true patriots. You let them spin their lies, then bury them with the truth. Keep up the good work.

Melin's picture

Why, no matter the gross incompetence, negligence and/or corruption, do so many people desire more regulation, regulators and bureaucrats to “do their job?”

AldousHuxley's picture

you mean regulation like glass-steagall?

 

Just because some judges are corrupt doesn't mean we need to take all judges out of the system.

 

Anonymouse's picture

Please mentally replace the word "judges" with the word "Jews" in your comment, and rethink every comment you have made.  Your hate has blinded you

Keri at Bankster Report's picture

Well, according to the New York Times, ZH is a "well-read and controversial financial blog" thats causin' lots of trouble for MS:

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/morgan-tries-to-quell-rumors-abou...

"Its latest round of troubles began on Friday morning before the markets opened at 9:30 a.m. Zero Hedge, a well-read and controversial financial blog, linked to a Bloomberg News article that noted Morgan’s credit-default swap spreads had been widening. The Zero Hedge post also directed readers to a previous Zero Hedge article that pegged Morgan Stanley’s net exposure to French banks at $39 billion, about $12 billion more than the bank’s current market capitalization, reigniting fears about its exposure."

Well, well, well....it continues:

"Calling Zero Hedge for damage control was not an option. The post was written by an anonymous blogger who goes by the name of “Tyler Durden,” a character in the movie “The Fight Club,” and the Web site does not give readers a way to readily reach its writers."

"Adding to Morgan Stanley’s woes, Friday was the last day of Morgan Stanley’s third quarter. The company is set to release its earnings in a few weeks, and securities laws limit what it can say about its financial condition. Unable to reach Zero Hedge, Morgan Stanley’s investor relations department went into overdrive, quickly pulling together talking points for callers that were circulated to both media and investor relations staff members."

Yes, your "bank" is so stable that a "controversial financial blog" is able to shake it?  Or would that be actualy underlying EXPOSURE of MS's exposure (by ZH) that is shaking it? 

"According to the talking points, reviewed by The New York Times, the numbers cited by Zero Hedge “represent gross asset positions and thus do not reflect the benefit of collateral or other hedges and protection, and the more relevant exposure to consider is the net exposure.” "

"Zero Hedge could not be reached for comment."

This is great!

MsCreant's picture

So ZH forgot to take into consideration mark to model THE ONLY HEDGE IN TOWN (NY, DC).

Those asset positions are gross alright. 

As if their buddies with the CDSs are good for it!

There is a money vacuum out there and it really sucks.

combatsnoopy's picture

No, Reggie Middleton already called out Goldman Sachs on their leverage in French banks too.  Funny how they already blew MS's cover by shorting them.

Element's picture

Isn't it interesting how these useless pricks blame even major stock collapses ... on the internet! ... not fundamentals ... not their lack of performance ... now you just blame zh 'n shit

It's the banker's equivalent of "the dog ate my homework" excuse.

Stupid, absurd, and totally unacceptable, as an excuse ... but so normalized that almost no one blinks at it.

 

EDIT: doesn't Morgan Stanley run the West Wing these days? ... WTF is the problem here then?

gmak's picture

The reality is that financial institutions DO engage in collateral agreements on swaps that is usually pegged to their internal risk assessments of counterparties. In today's markets, gross exposure and risk can be mitigated through swapping that risk (currency, interest rate, credit) off the books.

A currency swap would shift the Fx exposure from Euros to USD, as an example. In this type of transaction, principal is exchanged as well. The net result is that MS would see a USD loan  on their books with French Bank credit risk and swap counterparty credit risk. If they have a collateral agreement in place, then the NET VALUE of the swap would be protected by up to 100% in (usually) T-bills and/or T-notes.

The French bank credit risk could be hedged with CDS. (I'm assuming that the exposure is loans to french banks on the books in Euros)

The interest rate risk would be if the loan and funding didn't match (ie one was fixed rate and the other was floating). In interest rate swaps (essentially used to convert fixed to floating or vice versa), there is no exchange of principal - so the exposure is the net value of the two coupon streams (one from MS, one from the swap counterparty). The value is usually a fraction of the notional (face) amount of the swap because of the bi-directional coupon flows that net out. At inception, a swap's value is theoretically zero.

All this is to say that it is quite likely that th exposure could be comfortably hedged. It may not be - but unless one reads the appropriate notes in the financial stmts, it is difficult to say. MS probably has a number of fnding issues at the present time, and I would suggest that the Zero Hedge article increased the cost of funds for them - putting pressure on liquidity, and likely creating increased demands from their counterparties for collateral where appropriate.

The really interesting questions are: Are there a few counterparties out there that could be considered dumping grounds for poorly priced hedges such as was AIG? What would be the net exposure in the system of all swaps less collateral? The answrers to these would provide insight as to what the CBs of the world are really trying to protet.

Jean's picture

"Zero Hedge could not be reached for comment."

How the hell hard is it to log in? 

“represent gross asset positions and thus do not reflect the benefit of collateral or other hedges and protection, and the more relevant exposure to consider is the net exposure.” "

in other words, ZH was right, the hedges are likely worse off then the French Banks - who at least have the German taxpayers as a final backstop

 

 

g's picture

Absolutely amazing and stunning, Let the heads roll.

 

Good work ZH keep it up.

Abitdodgie's picture

She is not going to step down because they don't give a fuck what you think , our kill count is over 3,000,000 in Iraq, Afgan and Libya combined you don't give a fuck about them so why should the SEC give a fuck about you, if you want change in America go get a gun and all of us march on the whitehouse and string them up , untill you do that shut the fuck up.

AldousHuxley's picture

Before action there has to be an acknowledgement of the problem.

SEC Officials Hire Lawyers Amid Ethics Scrutiny

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/sec_officials_hire_lawyers_amid_e...

 

we all know the hiring of an attorney is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing.

 

But SEC is just a corrupt referee (small fry) on the orderliness of the game when the entire scoreboard of the match is manipulated by the Federal Reserve (big fry)

file a corruption complaint against the Fed and the SEC at: http://secwhistleblowerclaimscenter.com

Inibo E. Exibo's picture


Zuckerman Spaeder Builds Out Its New York Practice

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/zuckerman-spaeder-builds-out-its-new-york-practice/

 

Over the last 35 years, the Washington law firm Zuckerman Spaeder has built a well-regarded litigation boutique, largely inside the Beltway. Now, with the hiring of three prominent lawyers in two weeks, the firm has moved to establish a formidable criminal defense practice in New York...

 

The sharks are circling.

AE911Truth's picture

Agreed.

“A government afraid of its citizens is a Democracy. Citizens afraid of government is tyranny!”
? Thomas Jefferson

We will have liberty when we show the government we can defeat them.

Yamaha's picture

The only regulator more incompetant than the SEC is FINRA where the cops are only paid from their fines.  I think this model should be used with all police departments in the US.  Take a guy to jail - get part of the fine.  Write a ticket - get part of the fine.  That is how it works - its about money not real criminals.  Porn +money = SEC  Both regulators treasure their complete abuse of power and miss the topic......

Manthong's picture

"The only regulator more incompetant than the SEC "

I suggest you are mistaking corruption for incompetency.

Yamaha's picture

You may be right - I stand corrected.  That does sound better....

AldousHuxley's picture

Don't forget CFTC on commodity futures deregulation with Wendy Gramm

 

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/10/judge-cftc-corrupt-wendy-gramm-crim...

 

a judge complains in his retirement letter admin judge has never awarded a case to a investors in 20 years!!

 

After that scandal  senator Phil Gramm, Wendy's husband became vicechairman of UBS

In 2008, Gramm, McCain's most senior economic advisor explained the nation was not in a recession, stating, "You've heard of mental depression; this is a mental recession." He added, "We have sort of become a nation of whiners."

 

 

Yamaha's picture

There we go - lawyers and judges. Add UBS and that makes the Russians look like Quakers.

warchopper's picture

Nothing will be done until the market crashes. Someone, something, needs to be made the scape goats. It will be HFTs.

zorba THE GREEK's picture

The crash will be all ZH fault. The nerve of ZH printing the truth. "We can't handle the truth"

Finnykins's picture

Spread this. Everyone.

LongSoupLine's picture

Resign, to then immediately be offered a position with the Fed or Goldman (so, working for the same people...just a title change).

SGS's picture

I hate that bitch.